The Smoking Ban

[Dawg]

Comspec:

the government should put some money into promoting healthier eating, etc. This is not 'controlling' us

A lot of the money spent like this, (spent from the NHS budget), is preventative medicine, and an efficient use of resources.
One of the aims of the NHS when it was established was the promotion of preventative medicine which is a better route to general health care than continual firefighting.
The ban then, to stay on thread, serves the purposes of preventing workers from passive smoking and encouraging smokers to stop. It's not a control, rights or freedom issue.

I await Steve to scalpel this attitude on the bloody altar of liberterianism.

 

[Cornish Steve]

Most definitely, I agree with preventative medicine and with education. Also, I have no problem with sin taxes, if you will, that cover the cost of treatment needed for participating in such activities. For the record, that wouldn't include chocolate!

My issue is against the government forcing it's "nanny knows best" ideology on citizens - especially when members of government don't live up to their own dictates. Within reason, we should have the freedom to decide what we do, how we live, how we spend our money, and so on. The government represents us; it doesn't control us.

 

[KM-Tiger]

Laws are designed to get us all to behave in an acceptable manner. If there comes a time when laws are created which make no sense to me - then I will not be abiding by them, period.

Yes that was very well put. Very well put indeed.

It's exactly how most smokers feel about the ban in private, as distinct from public, places.

 

Laws are designed to get us all to behave in an acceptable manner. If there comes a time when laws are created which make no sense to me - then I will not be abiding by them, period.

well not sure on that.

I doubt if any one agrees with parking fines but we all pay them.

I would guess there are a lot of laws that don't make sense but people obey them

Earl

 

[Matt1959]

digressing a bit here, but I couldnt believe my ears today when I listened to a radio ad specifically warning people not to discard cigarette buts and warning of the fine involved should people be caught doing this. Good to see the powers that be have their priorities right

 

I agree that parking laws are a bit annoying, but they are also there for a reason and as such, I do obey them (when I can).

When I say 'not making sense', then I am talking about things that are just too silly for me to even consider, like the couple of examples I gave re chocolate and alcohol.

If I can justify a law to myself, then I will obey it. If I cannot figure out what it is all about, or if I think government is taking something away from me that I am not prepared to give - then I am going to suit myself.

The Smoking ban is a prime example - some people think it is hurting our civil liberties and there are examples of people who are openly breaking this law. Myself, I can see its purpose and I happily smoke outside.

 

[KM-Tiger]

digressing a bit here, but I couldnt believe my ears today when I listened to a radio ad specifically warning people not to discard cigarette buts and warning of the fine involved should people be caught doing this. Good to see the powers that be have their priorities right

No, I think that's right. Smokers shouldn't discard cigarette ends here there and everywhere. It's as bad as other forms of litter.

The practical problem for people that do smoke is the lack of bins and ashtrays. But Tesco come to the rescue! You can now buy pocket ashtrays. I've always got one in my pocket.

 

[Matt1959]

No, I think that's right. Smokers shouldn't discard cigarette ends here there and everywhere. It's as bad as other forms of litter.

quote]

but a whole radio ad for this????

 

[Cornish Steve]

I am talking about things that are just too silly for me to even consider, like the couple of examples I gave re chocolate and alcohol.

If a ban on alcohol is silly, then a ban on smoking is silly. What's your definition of 'silly'?

 

A ban on alcohol has no real foundation. It is taking away my liberty to enjoy drink as responsibly as I want to. It would be impractical to police and numerous people would flout it. Look at prohibition in the USA - it lead to more problems than it solved. A ban or rationing of chocolate bars just because someone tells me they are bad for me is not enough to make me want to adhere to the law either. I will decide what I put into my body and tough on whether or not I am actually 'allowed' to.

A ban on smoking in public places has actually been imposed and I agree with it because its total reason is to give non-smokers their basic rights. I have no 'right' to smoke anywhere that causes others to breathe in my smoke. I can accept that.

Using both of the above then - I will adhere to the smoking ban and do so happily. I will not be told, though, that I cannot have a drink when I want to.

'Silly' was a bad choice of word I will agree though.

 

[Cornish Steve]

A ban on alcohol has no real foundation. It is taking away my liberty to enjoy drink as responsibly as I want to.

And a ban on smoking in a private club is not?

It would be impractical to police and numerous people would flout it.

Why is it any different for people smoking in a private club?

I will decide what I put into my body and tough on whether or not I am actually 'allowed' to.

The smokers' argument to a tee.

'Silly' was a bad choice of word I will agree though.

Nope. I think you chose a very appropriate word.

 

I do agree with you about the 'private club' issue. It isn't something that really affects me, as I do not have membership of any. I am assuming that they thought it would be too difficult to have exceptions, therefore they gave none. I don't see the harm in allowing private clubs to have a smoking section, providing the employees actually have a say in it. It is there to protect the employees more so than the members.

'The smokers' argument to a tee.'

This is kind of taking my comment out of context, but it probably is the standard smokers argument as you say. In fact, I think you are arguing against the law on smoking moreso than me and I am a smoker.

I think the whole law itself will probably be amended over time, but I think it is an extremely difficult one because some people feel very strongly about it. The government done what they could and I agree it is not perfect - but it is a good start.

You do like to take things apart and analyse them Steve - is that the engineer coming out in you?

 

[Cornish Steve]

You do like to take things apart and analyse them Steve - is that the engineer coming out in you?

I take that as a compliment - thank you.

I can be an awkward so-and-so, I know, and I apologise for that; however, I can't help but look for general principles behind policies that affect our behaviours. In this case, there are conflicting principles, so it's not cut and dried. Personally, I err on the side of individual liberty rather than corporate good, even though the actions of some individuals (such as those who blow smoke in our faces or throw up in the street after heavy drinking) certainly do irritate.

 

[iklelamb]

I was all for the smoking ban, however now it forces people outside of pubs it makes areas and neighbourhoods look much more rough and dodgy, why can't all pubs have the smoking areas to the rear? Would others agree?

 

[DotNetWebs]

I was all for the smoking ban, however now it forces people outside of pubs it makes areas and neighbourhoods look much more rough and dodgy, why can't all pubs have the smoking areas to the rear? Would others agree?

Bizarre bump - it doesn't have anything to do with the link in you sig by any chance (or should that be cig)

Regards

Dotty

 

[movietub]

I was all for the smoking ban, however now it forces people outside of pubs it makes areas and neighbourhoods look much more rough and dodgy, why can't all pubs have the smoking areas to the rear? Would others agree?

Probably because most pubs don't have a rear space :|

There will be arguments about this one forever - obviously letting pubs choose what they did would have been an easier idea. Even if they were only allowed smokers indoors if they fitted air scrubbers - that would have addressed all health concerns, kept the punters in the pub and solved the problem of the smoke haze in front of the door that now elcomes all non smokers as they arrive.

 

[BenP]

There is a simple solution to the problem.

Electronic cigarette's

 

[anderson]

According to me it is a good decision as it is harmful to health.

 

[movietub]

According to me it is a good decision as it is harmful to health.

From the non smoking publics point of view it isn't harmful if air scrubbers are fitted.

From the smokers point of view it is less healthy to stand outside in the winter.

It's quite hypocritical of the Government to ban it on health issues, but still make it legal to smoke and collect a huge amount of tax. If they were worried about the health of the smokers concerned, they would ban cigarettes full stop. I smoke, and I wish they would!

That way we could all run round moaning for a maximum of two weeks and then we wouldn't care anymore.

 

[katy25]

Anyway it's healthier to ban smoking in pubs. I hate that you clothes smells like an ashtray after sitting in the bar. If it's less healthy to stand outside in the winter and smoke then you (smokers) will smoke less. As a consequence that would be better for smokers.

 

[movietub]

There is a simple solution to the problem.

Electronic cigarette's

These really are very good.

I tried one for a while in a couple of local pubs - it's a strange experience to say the least!!!

You spend half the time embarrassed as most people can tell it's not real, and would probably question if it's worth it - may as well just stop.

However the other half are the busy-bodies and finger waggers, and it's a lot of fun to wind these people up. Start smoking a realistic glowing fag that emits puffs of smoke and you hear the subdued comments as a wife subtly pushes her husband look at what she is seeing. After only a matter of moments you will notice them trying to attract the attention of the pub staff so that the smoker can be removed.

Normally at this stage the landlord appears and is so miffed at my blatant disregard for the smoking ban he fails to notice the device I'm holding contains batteries. Then, the debate starts that it still produces smoke, and is therfore illegal in his pub - which it does not and it isn't.

Luckily these devices come with cards that have the relevant laws printed on them which can be produced to settle a debate. Obviously the landlord won't like backing down, and the 'horrified' party at the next table will think it's a joke.

So it's probably not something to try in a pub you want to get along with!

 

[movietub]

Anyway it's healthier to ban smoking in pubs. I hate that you clothes smells like an ashtray after sitting in the bar. If it's less healthy to stand outside in the winter and smoke then you (smokers) will smoke less. As a consequence that would be better for smokers.

But you still have to walk past the smokers to get in. If there was a seperate room (in fact, just the smoking room that most old pubs had anyway!) and this was fitted with air scrubbers, it would be healthier still (for the non smokers).

That way pubs could choose based on what their customers wanted - which is really what the service industry should be about.

 

[katy25]

These air scrubbers supposed to be very good then. Sometimes it's impossible to sit in such rooms because of the smoke. But I would agree with you it's not a bad idea to have separate rooms. Anyway it's better for you quit smoking and all the problems would be solved.

 

[movietub]

These air scrubbers supposed to be very good then. Sometimes it’s impossible to sit in such rooms because of the smoke. But I would agree with you it’s not a bad idea to have separate rooms. Anyway it’s better for you quit smoking and all the problems would be solved.

They reallys are very good actually. There are all sorts of toxins in the air in a pub, germs from people, spores from woodwork and dried ale, smoke from smokers and any fire or candles. By passing the air through carbon or similar it is genuinly cleaner than even smoke free air would have been.

Thats why you're now more likely to catch a cold on an airplane - because since they banned smoking, they could turn off the air scrubbers (saves fuel = money), and the air quality decreased. Amazing but true!

 

[debbidoo]

Anyway it’s better for you quit smoking and all the problems would be solved.

Typical non-smoker statement

If it were that easy, don't you think we'd all do it?

Over the years I've tried all sorts. Willpower alone, nicotine replacement, vile mouthwashes, books telling me why smoking is "baaaad m'kaaaay", hypnotism CDs, you name it. I've come to the conclusion it's easier to just give up giving up - at least that's something I can achieve

 

[katy25]

Typical non-smoker statement

You wouldn’t believe but I’m a smoker. And I don’t really like this fact and trying to give it up)))))))) Although I’m a smoker I don’t like when people smoke in pubs including myself)

 

[debbidoo]

You wouldn’t believe but I’m a smoker. And I don’t really like this fact and trying to give it up)))))))) Although I’m a smoker I don’t like when people smoke in pubs including myself)

Fair play and sorry for my mistake

I actually don't mind the smoking ban - forces me to exercise more self-control. I tend to smoke more when I'm drinking, so having to go outside suits me fine And means I don't have to irritate non-smoking friends by blowing smoke near them

 

[katy25]

Yes))))))) absolutely agree. When I am in a bar and drinking I can smoke a pack of cigarettes during one evening) easy....that's why I don't mind the ban either.

 

[Cobby]

They reallys are very good actually. There are all sorts of toxins in the air in a pub, germs from people, spores from woodwork and dried ale, smoke from smokers and any fire or candles. By passing the air through carbon or similar it is genuinly cleaner than even smoke free air would have been.

It's a nice idea but unless you give each smoker a little air tube to blow directly into you'll still be sitting in a smoky room, a little less smoky than pre-ban but it'll still be enough to affect all the patrons.

Much better to hold your breath for a few seconds and bundle through the hunched, shivering addicts on the way in and out, but have a nice smoke-free environment in which to enjoy your drink and/or dinner.

Although I vaguely remember hearing about suggestions to ban smoking within x metres of the entrances of public places which would solve both problems, but is possibly a step too far for the poor blighters.

 

[mobyme]

Last summer we held a huge open air barbecue, my wife who is a non smoker thought we ought to make it a non smoking event; I wouldn't agree so we compromised and roped off a separate area for smokers complete with it's own bar and barbecue.
What a fiasco! I would love to know who all these non smokers are; we finished up with about 450 people in the smoking area, and about 60 in the non smoking area which had been allocated the majority of the space, food and booze.
We couldn't change things round easily because in our wisdom we had hired a marquee with sides in for the non smokers while the smoking area one just had a roof and two sides.
The whole event was basically ruined down to accommodating the preferences of the non smokers.
When we sent out the invitations we had no idea who was a smoker and who wasn't except for a few close friends.
Even then one of the non smoking people had the nerve to tell me that it was a pity that I had allowed smoking because it had spoiled the event for her. I am not going to tell you what my reply was but it wasn't pleasant.

 

[Cobby]

Last summer we held a huge open air barbecue, my wife who is a non smoker thought we ought to make it a non smoking event; I wouldn't agree so we compromised and roped off a separate area for smokers complete with it's own bar and barbecue.
What a fiasco! I would love to know who all these non smokers are; we finished up with about 450 people in the smoking area, and about 60 in the non smoking area which had been allocated the majority of the space, food and booze.
We couldn't change things round easily because in our wisdom we had hired a marquee with sides in for the non smokers while the smoking area one just had a roof and two sides.
The whole event was basically ruined down to accommodating the preferences of the non smokers.
When we sent out the invitations we had no idea who was a smoker and who wasn't except for a few close friends.
Even then one of the non smoking people had the nerve to tell me that it was a pity that I had allowed smoking because it had spoiled the event for her. I am not going to tell you what my reply was but it wasn't pleasant.

You segregated the party (and along a controversial line, too). Why are you surprised it turned out like it did?
If you'd made it all non-smoking or all-smoking you'd probably have had a few people from either side of the fence not turn up at all, but the rest of the party would have been fine. A lesson for you in human nature!

 

[mobyme]

You segregated the party (and along a controversial line, too). Why are you surprised it turned out like it did?
If you'd made it all non-smoking or all-smoking you'd probably have had a few people from either side of the fence not turn up at all, but the rest of the party would have been fine. A lesson for you in human nature!

I didn't segregate anybody; I pandered to my wife's political correctness and provided a choice. I made the mistake of listening to her and her friends who believed there were far more non smokers than smokers and allocated them the larger area.
The barbecue on the whole was a huge success; it just turned into a lot more work in one overcrowded area.
I will be doing similar this year only the non smokers will be designated a much smaller area down by the river where the midges are.
I never had any strong views about smokers and non smokers prior to this but it seems to me now, that it is a minority dictating to a majority (who are not all smokers) who couldn't give a toot one way or the other. Even the Mrs agrees and that's a first.

 

[Cobby]

I didn't segregate anybody; I pandered to my wife's political correctness and provided a choice. I made the mistake of listening to her and her friends who believed there were far more non smokers than smokers and allocated them the larger area.
The barbecue on the whole was a huge success; it just turned into a lot more work in one overcrowded area.
I will be doing similar this year only the non smokers will be designated a much smaller area down by the river where the midges are.
I never had any strong views about smokers and non smokers prior to this but it seems to me now, that it is a minority dictating to a majority (who are not all smokers) who couldn't give a toot one way or the other. Even the Mrs agrees and that's a first.

Two marquees, two barbecues, two areas. Each area assigned by categorising people as smokers or non-smokers. Sounds like they were segregated! Don't view them as smokers and non-smokers, view them simply as guests!

During the summer, I held a couple of barbecues for friends as 'lock ins' behind my café. I asked people to step out of the garden into the street if they wished to smoke. They did so without complaint and everybody had a great time; the smokers didn't even mention it. Hope you have as much success next time!

 

[movietub]

It's a nice idea but unless you give each smoker a little air tube to blow directly into you'll still be sitting in a smoky room, a little less smoky than pre-ban but it'll still be enough to affect all the patrons.

Much better to hold your breath for a few seconds and bundle through the hunched, shivering addicts on the way in and out, but have a nice smoke-free environment in which to enjoy your drink and/or dinner.

Although I vaguely remember hearing about suggestions to ban smoking within x metres of the entrances of public places which would solve both problems, but is possibly a step too far for the poor blighters.

There is no chance of smoke escaping so long as it's a seperate room. The air scrubbers drag air from the door to the back. It also allows for staff to get in to clean/empty ashtrays at zero risk as the air would be cleared within a short time after the last smoker left.

Of course it sounds like a lot of hassle... But ask a pub thats on it's backside since the ban and they would probably jump at the chance. Also remember that as soon as one pub did, they would probably see an increase in smoker custom.

As I said before, I wish they would just ban cigs full stop. But it's wrong to force businesses to become less friendly to a large % of their customers, especially if there were alternatives available. Is this really what we pay the government for? If people wanted non smoking pubs they would have been all over the place. The government is better to focus on issues such as global financial meltdown, and let the pub going customers vote with their feet if there is a problem with smoking!

 

[business.is.my.life]

This ban, is an absolute F-ing pleasure, and I can't bleedin wait for it to come into action, I can't stand smoke full stop!

It's a good idea! I have a client, that has loads of staff, the smokers take the piss and use the fags as an excuse for a break, these are lazy twunks at their best. (not saying ALL smokers do that but I know more that do, then don't)

This client, is making a shelter up outside the building, just so smokers can go there and have a smoke! It's a luxury and dirty habit, smoking should be banned full stop, and made illegal...

To bring up an old comment... I'm a smoker, and managed to get away with 'fag breaks' all the time, whic I myself found unfair to the non-smoker. Though still, now coming up to 2011 after the smoking ban being in place for so long, should it not be allowed that (for instance) a pub called "THE SMOKERS INN" should be able to apply for a licence to allow smoking in their establishment?

1) Surely any non-smoker would not go into a place called "The smokers inn"
2) It becomes clear it is the customers choice whether or not to enter
3) What harm does it cause the customer if they've entered willingly knowing the facts.....

I understand the smoking ban, I used to hate smokers (before I became one), but still..to ban it in ALL pubs/clubs is extreme

 

[JohnnyCash]

I don't understand how the UK government can make such a major issue out of something they shouldn't be meddling in the first place. Makes me glad to be an expat and not dealing with all their nonsense.


If non smoking pubs were in big demand, then even without a single law, market forces would have created them.

I don't think there is any health issues in having customers smoke, as if its a smoking bar, as a non smoker I know this before I go, and can make the choice whether to attend or not.

I'm not sure why they didn't just let the landlords choose, but change job seekers regulations so that no person seeking employment could be penalised (via jobseekers allowance/any other of the multiple freebies they are on) for turning down the chance of employment where customers were allowed to smoke.

 

[business.is.my.life]

I don't understand how the UK government can make such a major issue out of something they shouldn't be meddling in the first place. Makes me glad to be an expat and not dealing with all their nonsense.


If non smoking pubs were in big demand, then even without a single law, market forces would have created them.

I don't think there is any health issues in having customers smoke, as if its a smoking bar, as a non smoker I know this before I go, and can make the choice whether to attend or not.

I'm not sure why they didn't just let the landlords choose, but change job seekers regulations so that no person seeking employment could be penalised (via jobseekers allowance/any other of the multiple freebies they are on) for turning down the chance of employment where customers were allowed to smoke.

This is exactly my point....if consumers and landlords had a CHOICE in the matter, then surely both would benefit. The consumer could choose whether of not they would like to enter...and the ownder of the pub could make the decision on how it would effect their business

 

[Cobby]

There is no chance of smoke escaping so long as it's a seperate room. The air scrubbers drag air from the door to the back. It also allows for staff to get in to clean/empty ashtrays at zero risk as the air would be cleared within a short time after the last smoker left.

The point was if the air is cleared a 'short time' after the last smoker, then it's not zero risk. If you can so much as smell it then it's doing harm. I don't think forcing pubs to spend thousands of pounds for a big fan would have been a very good idea.

 

[JoyDivision]

I personaly as a none smoker love the smoking ban and I go out clubbing a lot more because of it. I used to hate clubbing because I of the air quality.

I used to always try and aim to go to none smoking pubs too .

Ireland was my first taste of this heaven.

 

[MASSEY]

As a smoker it never really bothered me . I feel sorry for all the non smokers that had our smoke stuffed in their faces. In terms of human rights it's bang on.